Girls Rights Matter

[Wisconsin Beth]

Sept 3, 2015 12:22:46 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Sept 3, 2015 12:12:37 GMT -5 Wisconsin Beth said:

My daughter is 7, my son is almost 6.  In places with multiple stalls, they want me by the sinks while they take care of business.  In single stall/user bathrooms, DD goes in and I wait outside.  With DS, I go in and turn my back because he wants me in there but he doesn't want me looking. 

I've tried to send DS into multiple stall men's rooms.  It's a no go.  He'll stick his head in and decide he doesn't need to go.    I think he's uncomfortable with urinals. 

But I have 1 boy, 1 girl and they often see each other naked. 

Do you take the boy into the lady's room with you and wait by the sink while he's in the stall, or do you take him into the men's room and wait by the sink?

Ladies room because 98% of the time I have DD too.  And if one's going potty, they both go.  And I follow the rule of 'never miss a chance to pee' so I go too. 

I've peed in men's rooms before.  As I get older, I have less patience for the lines for the ladies room.  So if the men's room is single user and empty, I'll use that. 

[Deleted]

I've peed in men's rooms before. As I get older, I have less patience for the lines for the ladies room. So if the men's room is single user and empty, I'll use that.

Yep, I've lost patience with the idea that I can't use a perfectly good single user washroom just because the stick figure on the door doesn't have a skirt on. Most days I don't either.

[NastyWoman]

Democracy - Key Elements

In order to deserve the label modern democracy, a country needs to fulfill some basic requirements - and they need not only be written down in it's constitution but must be kept up in everyday life by politicians and authorities:

•Guarantee of basic Human Rights to every individual person vis-à-vis the state and its authorities as well as vis-à-vis any social groups (especially religious institutions) and vis-à-vis other persons.

Democracy as I understand it has always been "rule by the people (majority) while protecting the rights of the individual (minority). So it is pretty much in line with the description above. In this case, the use of bathroom/locker room, there is a compromise available but the affected person refuses to compromise.  Who is right? I can't really say. 

However, with all laws in place to protect certain people there are also cases in which a compromise may be much harder to come by if not impossible. For instance: suppose person A is deadly allergic to dogs and person B needs a helper dog for whatever reason (blind, diabetic, PTSD, etc., etc.). Both people book seats on a 10 hour flight in economy class. Who gets the right to have his/her limitation accomodated?  A may die with dog on board, B may die without?  We don't have a pecking order for this.  And so we sue because others may have "more" rights acknowledged...  

[Deleted]

Sept 2, 2015 14:54:29 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

When it comes to women's bathrooms, I don't care much what gender a user might be. Women's bathrooms have only stalls. Go into the stall, close the door, and do your business. As long as you're in there with the door closed, I don't have a view of your "bits" so it doesn't make a difference. However, I've lived in countries where unisex bathrooms were a matter of course. Nobody even gave it a thought. I can understand, in this country, how women using a men's bathroom might be a problem because of the urinals. However, you're not going to be exposed to something you don't see,  so don't look! Do your business, wash your hands, and get outa Dodge. Why is this so darned complicated?

Because of the awe and power of the penis! It has the ability to cause fear and apprehension among women even when it goes unseen... just by being in the same room!!!  

Just kidding.

Seriously though, I agree with the unbolded part. Go into a stall, do what you went in there to do, wash your hands and then leave. That's what a bathroom is for.

Individual urinals without stalls or even dividers wouldn't even really be a problem if the women don't go over to them and "peek in" at a man standing there doing his business. I've been using urinals since I was tall enough to do so. I can count on one hand (with no fingers) the amount of times I've accidentally seen another man's "junk" (for reference that's ZERO times). Roughly 40 years now and not once have I been witness to another man's "junk" at a wall of urinals.

The only place I could see any problem would be at stadiums that use a "communal urinal" (if any even still exist... it's been decades since I've been to a stadium) where dozens of men use the same "trough" at the same time. But even then, for a woman to see penis, she'd have to be standing AT the "trough".

It's not like men unzip when entering the room, fish themselves out of their trousers AND THEN walk up to the urinal. Nor do they wait until they get to the door to put themselves back in and zip up. The common procedure is:

1. Walk up to urinal
2. Face urinal
3. unzip fly
4. remove penis from pants
5. point at urinal
6. urinate
7. "shake off" any remaining drop(s)
8. put penis back in pants
9. re-zip fly
10. back away from urinal

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Sept 2, 2015 10:39:07 GMT -5 kent said:

www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-transgender-teen-used-the-girls%e2%80%99-locker-room-now-her-community-is-up-in-arms/ar-AAdSn1R

If Jenner weren’t already a rich celebrity, would she have received the same support? How would other, less famous transgender Americans be treated?

On Monday morning, a small town in Missouri provided an answer.

For two hours, approximately 150 students stood in front of Hillsboro High School to protest a transgender teen’s use of the girls’ facilities.

And for those same two hours, the 17-year-old transgender teen huddled inside her counselor’s office — with the door locked.

“I was concerned about my own safety,” Lila Perry told the New York Times.

It’s not just her fellow students that are upset over Perry’s use of the girls’ bathroom and locker room. The issue has roiled this town, thrusting a quaint community of about 3,000 into the national spotlight. Last week, a school board meeting had to be moved after too many people attended to discuss Perry. And on Monday afternoon, the protesting students — who comprised about 13 percent of the school — were joined by angry adults.

“This needs to stop before it goes too far,” Jeff Childs, who has a niece and a nephew in the Hillsboro School System, told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. He and his 21-year-old son showed up to the school with “Girls Rights Matter” painted on the sides and back of his pickup truck.

“I’m not trying to be ignorant, but [the transgender student] is bringing it out in public for everybody else to deal with,” Childs said.

The controversy suggests that in some American communities......

Go ahead and flame away, but I'm not sure I understand why we should let a transgender person use the restrooms they identify with and not base it off the type of anatomy he or she has at a particular point in time.  Basically, until the surgery happens, the person uses the facilities that is geared toward genitalia.  It's been my experience that the transgender people I've known were all men and all still liked women (and yes I know that isn't always the case).  We don't let gay men with no sexual interest in women use female facilities, why should we let transgender men who are attracted to women and have male genitalia use female facilities?  Does that person's feelings trump any feelings of the women who might be uncomfortable or feel unsafe being put in that situation?  

Again, I know we've been conditioned to think that even asking such a question makes a person bigoted, but that is utter non-sense.  Like I said, after surgery, I don't see the issue...before surgery, I can understand why people might be concerned about it and being bigoted or ignorant about it isn't really the reason (otherwise people would have more of an issue with people using those restrooms even after surgery).

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Sept 2, 2015 14:15:24 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Sept 2, 2015 13:55:53 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

I  am an adult and I don't want to use the same bathroom as the opposite sex. 

Some adults aren't comfortable using the same bathroom as people of color. Where do we draw the line? Personally I think we should just go unisex. It'll be weird for those of us that grew up with sexually segregated bathrooms and locker rooms, but will seem normal within a generation.

While I was in the military the female bathrooms/showers were having plumbing issues during the week we did field exercises. They started sharing ours, and the showers were a big open room with shower heads spaced around the walls. No curtains, no dividers, no stalls. The toilet stalls had no doors. It really wasn't that big of a deal. There was some peaking in the showers, by both sexes, but mostly you went in, did your business quickly, and got out. Having a woman showering in the open ten feet away was less uncomfortable than simultaneously sharing a shower head with another dude. Way less.

The military allowed open showers with both genders?  I'm not saying it didn't happen, but having a tough time with this one because it would have only taken 1 person complaining to have the commander be in a lot of trouble.  It wouldn't have even taken a person complaining, it would have just taking a person telling somebody else about it and working it's way up the chain to somebody who did have an issue with it.

[fishy999]

Just asking- what kind of people would go looking for some sexual turn on in the restroom?  Never mind the perverts- they are gross.

 

[Deleted]

Yes, it would be much less uncomfortable if people dressed as the opposite gender used your rest room... Than if people dressed like your gender but with opposite, hidden,privates used your restroom. 

[zibazinski]

I don't care about the rest room. I do care about the locker room.

[Tennesseer]

Fear not.  South Dakota has the answer:


'Visual inspection' could be part of state law to determine gender identity


PIERRE | A proposal by a state lawmaker could require that visual inspection be used as part of a process to officially determine a person's gender in South Dakota, including for high school athletes.

The battle over how to officially determine someone's gender arises from a controversy over whether transgender high school students can declare their own gender when participating in sports.

A high school athletic group enacted a policy last year that allows students to decide for themselves which gender group they will compete with. But some lawmakers are unhappy with that concept.

So, the issue appears poised to carry into the 2016 legislative session, and one possible approach would be a law that may remove a person's right to decide for themselves.

The Legislature’s interim committee dealt with the issue Thursday and requested a draft of a potential state law.

The proposal from Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, would rely on official birth certificates and visual inspections for determining gender rather than allowing people to decide and declare their gender on their own.

He said gender is determined at conception and the transgender debate is riding the gay marriage wave.

“This is South Dakota. We haven’t adopted the East Coast culture. We haven’t adopted the West Coast culture. We maintain our own culture,” Hunt said.


'Visual inspection' could be part of state law to determine gender identity

[zibazinski]

Oh dear. Well there's a new job description. .

[Tennesseer]

Job title:  Perv In Residence.

[zibazinski]

I think if I was the teacher forced to do that, id have to resign. Not for religious reasons but for the yuck factor.

[Deleted]

OMG they can't be serious...

[zibazinski]

I don't want to look at anyone's naughty bits. I wonder if having to show them is a way of discouraging gender different people from using the gender different locker/rest room?

[Tennesseer]

Sept 5, 2015 19:20:39 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

I don't want to look at anyone's naughty bits. I wonder if having to show them is a way of discouraging gender different people from using the gender different locker/rest room?

Wait until a hermaphrodite has to show his/her bits to whom ever is doing the checking.

[Virgil Showlion]

Sept 2, 2015 14:23:05 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Can we just pull up the thread where we discussed this the last time it came up?

And the next time it comes up...



And the time after that...



And in June of 2017...

[zibazinski]

Talking about things that "come up."

[Virgil Showlion]

The vast majority of clinical hermaphrodites identify as male or female and have consistent genitalia. Those that don't identify as either male or female prefer to be called "intersexed". The condition is exceptionally rare, and since the genitals are malformed, a teenager not already subject to medical intervention would be rarer still.

In practical terms, the odds of a "genital inspector" coming across a difficult-to-judge in his/her lifetime are negligible.

That doesn't make it a good idea, but...

[djAdvocate]

Sept 5, 2015 20:20:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The vast majority of clinical hermaphrodites identify as male or female and have consistent genitalia. Those that don't identify as either male or female prefer to be called "intersexed". The condition is exceptionally rare, and since the genitals are malformed, a teenager not already subject to medical intervention would be rarer still.

In practical terms, the odds of a "genital inspector" coming across a difficult-to-judge in his/her lifetime are negligible.

That doesn't make it a good idea, but...

the rarity is irrelevant.  but, given the fact that you are excellent at logic, you already know that.

[Deleted]

But they would have to check EVERYONE. Just to be sure... Insanity.

[Deleted]

This is why we need to either go to unisex (and teach kids that there's nothing shameful about a human body)... or stop using "boys/men" & "girls/women" and go to "has penis" & "has vagina" to label the separated rooms.

[Virgil Showlion]

A question occurred to me earlier: How "easy" is it to cross-gender-identify?

Consider: I'm clearly male. To look at me naked, no reasonable person would conclude otherwise. I wear no jewelry or makeup. My clothes are distinctly male (or at least: not distinctly female). I have a distinctly male name. Let's call me "Virgil".

I'm also a malcontent and a social activist, and my mission is to test society (and the courts in particular) on the reasonable limits of gender self-identification. Hence one bright sunny day I decide that I am no longer Virgil the man but Virgil the woman, and to assert my confidence in my newfound female identity, I boldly walk into the women's restroom at work.

This creates quite a stir. Complaints and reports fly in spite of my protests that I identify as a woman, and I shortly find myself facing an HR committee. They let me know in no uncertain terms that my "immature stunt" is wholly inappropriate and will not be tolerated. Some insinuate that I may be suffering from mental issues. In response, I break down in tears and pour out my heart that I've always identified a woman but feared persecution, felt social pressure to conform, wasn't hugged enough as a child, etc., etc. Alas they don't buy it and they give me an ultimatum: use the men's washroom or find another job.

Well!

What is a spurned LGBTQQPPA2IISK spectrumer to do except sue my employer and get the courts--that bastion of liberty and sound thinking--to force my employer to accommodate me?

I'm wealthy, hence finding a lawyer willing to sell out and take on my case is a trivial matter. I make it clear that I'm not willing to make any alterations to my appearance, behaviour, or lifestyle in order to conform with female gender norms. I am a woman because I identify as a woman. Women can have beards, body hair, and male genitals (brave Caitlyn has helped dispel public ignorance on the subject). Women can have male voices, wear male clothing, have male names like "Virgil". They can have male birth certificates, father children, have men's sports trophies sitting on their mantles. The only thing that matters is that I believe with all my heart that I am Virgil the woman. This entitles me to go anywhere women can go, participate in any league women can participate in, apply for any grants, bursaries, assistance, etc. that only women can apply for, and to be fairly considered by any public business, organization, or charity that offers services specifically to women (e.g. I could sue a battered women's shelter for refusing me entry on the basis that I don't appear to be a woman).

Suppose you're a judge in the courtroom presiding over my lawsuit against my employer. What are your thoughts? Are you going to permit my employer to discriminate against me, or are you going to draw a line in the sand as to a minimum degree of gender conformance to be able to assert womanhood? If so, what is that minimum degree? What is the bare minimum you'll force me to do to prove that I'm "woman enough" to be entitled to all the aforementioned privileges? What is your logic?

All serious opinions welcome.

[Deleted]

Sept 6, 2015 10:59:50 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Sept 5, 2015 22:03:04 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

This is why we need to either go to unisex (and teach kids that there's nothing shameful about a human body)... or stop using "boys/men" & "girls/women" and go to "has penis" & "has vagina" to label the separated rooms.

Reminds of Whitey's Saloon in Minneapolis...on the door to the bathrooms there are drawings of torsos...one with a martini glass and one with a beer bottle 

It's pretty clear who should use which. 

link to yelp page with pictures 

We know which one James Bond would use... LOL

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Sept 6, 2015 11:25:12 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

A question occurred to me earlier: How "easy" is it to cross-gender-identify?

Consider: I'm clearly male. To look at me naked, no reasonable person would conclude otherwise. I wear no jewelry or makeup. My clothes are distinctly male (or at least: not distinctly female). I have a distinctly male name. Let's call me "Virgil".

I'm also a malcontent and a social activist, and my mission is to test society (and the courts in particular) on the reasonable limits of gender self-identification. Hence one bright sunny day I decide that I am no longer Virgil the man but Virgil the woman, and to assert my confidence in my newfound female identity, I boldly walk into the women's restroom at work.

This creates quite a stir. Complaints and reports fly in spite of my protests that I identify as a woman, and I shortly find myself facing an HR committee. They let me know in no uncertain terms that my "immature stunt" is wholly inappropriate and will not be tolerated. Some insinuate that I may be suffering from mental issues. In response, I break down in tears and pour out my heart that I've always identified a woman but feared persecution, felt social pressure to conform, wasn't hugged enough as a child, etc., etc. Alas they don't buy it and they give me an ultimatum: use the men's washroom or find another job.

Well!

What is a spurned LGBTQQPPA2IISK spectrumer to do except sue my employer and get the courts--that bastion of liberty and sound thinking--to force my employer to accommodate me?

I'm wealthy, hence finding a lawyer willing to sell out and take on my case is a trivial matter. I make it clear that I'm not willing to make any alterations to my appearance, behaviour, or lifestyle in order to conform with female gender norms. I am a woman because I identify as a woman. Women can have beards, body hair, and male genitals (brave Caitlyn has helped dispel public ignorance on the subject). Women can have male voices, wear male clothing, have male names like "Virgil". They can have male birth certificates, father children, have men's sports trophies sitting on their mantles. The only thing that matters is that I believe with all my heart that I am Virgil the woman. This entitles me to go anywhere women can go, participate in any league women can participate in, apply for any grants, bursaries, assistance, etc. that only women can apply for, and to be fairly considered by any public business, organization, or charity that offers services specifically to women (e.g. I could sue a battered women's shelter for refusing me entry on the basis that I don't appear to be a woman).

Suppose you're a judge in the courtroom presiding over my lawsuit against my employer. What are your thoughts? Are you going to permit my employer to discriminate against me, or are you going to draw a line in the sand as to a minimum degree of gender conformance to be able to assert womanhood? If so, what is that minimum degree? What is the bare minimum you'll force me to do to prove that I'm "woman enough" to be entitled to all the aforementioned privileges? What is your logic?

All serious opinions welcome.

I think nobody really wants to answer your question because they understand the issues that can come up with such a judgement.  However, such issues aren't really discussed and many times it seems there is an attempt to try to downplay it as non-sense that such a thing could happen (especially with those who like to portray anybody who thinks that maybe that is going too far is just an ignorant bigot). 

[Virgil Showlion]

Sept 8, 2015 15:32:11 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

I think nobody really wants to answer your question because they understand the issues that can come up with such a judgement.  However, such issues aren't really discussed and many times it seems there is an attempt to try to downplay it as non-sense that such a thing could happen (especially with those who like to portray anybody who thinks that maybe that is going too far is just an ignorant bigot). 

I think nobody wants to answer the question because there's no good way to do so.

If you refuse to draw a line in the sand, you have to accept that "male" and "female" lose all legal distinction and embrace a host of absurd implications.

If you do draw a line in the sand, you're necessarily going to draw it where it puts an untold number of brave Caitlyns on the wrong side, where you're forced to admit that a man who thinks he's a woman is still a man.

FWIW, my assessment:

XX: female;  XY: male

For the tiny subset of society with true chimerism, XXY, or not-XX-not-XY, which Wikipedia puts at ~0.1% of the population: gender as determined by the sole set of functional sex organs, or by self-identification if the individual has no functional sex organs. Any school, sporting agency, etc. contesting an individual's gender would have to accept a standard letter from an accredited doctor/lab testifying to these facts.

[fishy999]

And being pissed about the rape comment- the male/female thing is XX or XY.  Male or Female.  That is biology.  But there are so many cases where gender is questionable and the doctors and/or parents make the choice.   And sometimes they get it wrong.  I want no part in the decision.

[ArchietheDragon]

Sept 9, 2015 8:12:04 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Oh, but we do have two, Men and Women, for the shop floor.

Shop workers are animals 

[ArchietheDragon]

Sept 9, 2015 8:20:53 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sept 9, 2015 8:16:18 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Shop workers are animals 

Unlike office workers, who are plants.

This is why we have to be very careful in the Orthorexia Nervosa thread. Don't want to be lunch.

More like tofu.  Bland and limp, but the idea is the same. 

[ArchietheDragon]

Sept 9, 2015 8:24:17 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Ew. Are you saying that you got hired because your picture looks bland and limp?

bland and limp helps when you are an accountant.